Principal Sir Arthur Currie and the Department of Chinese Studies at McGill
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article presents a brief history of the Department of Chinese Studies at McGill University. It examines Principal Currie’s tireless efforts to create such a department, and discusses various factors — such as the state of international relations in the 1920s and the establishment of the Gest Chinese Library — which motivated him. It describes Currie’s search for a Director, his selection of Dr. Kiang Kang-hu for the position, the Department’s years of operation, and its eventual closure in 1934.ResuméCet article présente les grandes lignes de l’évolution du Département d’études chinoises de l’Université McGill. Il examine les efforts déployés par le principal Currie pour créer ce département ainsi que certains facteurs qui ont motivé ses actions, notamment l’état des relations internationales durant les années 1920 et la fondation de la Bibliothèque chinoise Gest. L’article décrit le processus de sélection d’un Directeur par Currie, son choix du Dr. Kiang Kang-hu, les années d’opération du Département et sa fermeture éventuelle en 1934.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.048 | 0.006 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".